itd-2610170634394993 calls the hold on the shared remote a claim; in 27-implement, a claim is the run-state lock on this machine that keeps sessions apart.

itd-2610170634394993 calls the hold on the shared remote a claim; in 27-implement, a claim is the run-state lock on this machine that keeps sessions apart.

A naming conflict (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/intents/planned/itd-2610170634394993-several-headless-agents-work-one.md:22 — "Each agent takes a piece of work by a claim on the shared remote"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/27-implement.md:5 — "makes a record the unit of exclusion between them with a claim"

27-implement's claim is the per-record file in the machine-scoped run state that keeps one person's sessions apart. The coordination intent says each agent takes work 'by a claim on the shared remote' and re-checks 'a claim's generation number', meaning the hold on origin (which shipped as reservations). One name now covers two mechanisms with different scope, lease and failure behaviour.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 721.